Thought on New Mexico draw process

LIK2HNT

Long Time Member
Messages
3,334
Please keep this civil. I am just throwing out this idea to NM because it is one of the true random draw processes out there. I am a NR so take that for what it is worth.
I did not want to side track the other recent thread. Seems like a lot of residents are worried about increasing applicants and lower and lower draw odds. Please think about this idea and post and pros and cons you see with it. Times are changing, and I feel everyone needs to give a little to gain.

What if you could only apply every other year based on your birth date? Theoretically this would cut applicants in half, greatly increasing odds. Something like this:

Odd birth years (example for 2023) can apply for Deer, Oryx, Ibex

Even birth years (example for 2023) can apply for Elk, Bighorn Sheep, Barbary Sheep
——————————————-

Even birth years (example for 2024) can apply for Deer, Oryx, Ibex

Odd birth years (example for 2024) can apply for Elk, Bighorn Sheep, Barbary Sheep

The next year they would switch. So every year you would apply for something, yet only be ably to apply for a specific species every other year.

Left over tags would be up for grabs for anyone.

One con I see with this is for group and family group hunters. Not everyone would have/be able to get a tag. This is where a little give comes in. They could still go and help out though. But odds of being draw are greatly increased.

As a NR I have drawn an Oryx tag in 2000 and my daughter drew a youth deer tag 10 years ago. I like NM system except for the outfitter allocation, but that is out of my control.
Thanks
 
Please keep this civil. I am just throwing out this idea to NM because it is one of the true random draw processes out there. I am a NR so take that for what it is worth.
I did not want to side track the other recent thread. Seems like a lot of residents are worried about increasing applicants and lower and lower draw odds. Please think about this idea and post and pros and cons you see with it. Times are changing, and I feel everyone needs to give a little to gain.

What if you could only apply every other year based on your birth date? Theoretically this would cut applicants in half, greatly increasing odds. Something like this:

Odd birth years (example for 2023) can apply for Deer, Oryx, Ibex

Even birth years (example for 2023) can apply for Elk, Bighorn Sheep, Barbary Sheep
——————————————-

Even birth years (example for 2024) can apply for Deer, Oryx, Ibex

Odd birth years (example for 2024) can apply for Elk, Bighorn Sheep, Barbary Sheep

The next year they would switch. So every year you would apply for something, yet only be ably to apply for a specific species every other year.

Left over tags would be up for grabs for anyone.

One con I see with this is for group and family group hunters. Not everyone would have/be able to get a tag. This is where a little give comes in. They could still go and help out though. But odds of being draw are greatly increased.

As a NR I have drawn an Oryx tag in 2000 and my daughter drew a youth deer tag 10 years ago. I like NM system except for the outfitter allocation, but that is out of my control.
Thanks
I’m not a fan my friend. Good thoughts outside the box but I really love an equal playing field year after year! Even if the field is getting bigger and more messy!
Two things off the top of my head I would change…
#1) ONE WEAPON CHOICES FOR SURE!
#2) NO CREDIT CARD APPS ! MONEY MUST BE TAKEN FROM A BANK ACCOUNT!
I believe that would eliminate the greenies!
OH …… 90/10 split with NR
 
I’m not a fan my friend. Good thoughts outside the box but I really love an equal playing field year after year! Even if the field is getting bigger and more messy!
Two things off the top of my head I would change…
#1) ONE WEAPON CHOICES FOR SURE!
#2) NO CREDIT CARD APPS ! MONEY MUST BE TAKEN FROM A BANK ACCOUNT!
I believe that would eliminate the greenies!
OH …… 90/10 split with NR
Serious question, do we really know if the greenies are applying for tags just to not use them? Seems like we could find someone bragging about it in social media if they did.
 
Fine with the 90/10 split, just would like to see the outfitter welfare stopped.
Do you think that many people upfront the app. fees and carry that amount on their credit card? I don’t know, just asking. As a NR I put out over 6k this year in NM. I would not like to carry that and pay interest on my c/c but that’s me. Being able to mail in a check or direct from bank account without paying a processing fee would be great.
 
Fine with the 90/10 split, just would like to see the outfitter welfare stopped.
Do you think that many people upfront the app. fees and carry that amount on their credit card? I don’t know, just asking. As a NR I put out over 6k this year in NM. I would not like to carry that and pay interest on my c/c but that’s me. Being able to mail in a check or direct from bank account without paying a processing fee would be great.
I know a ton of people that wait until the last week to apply just to use theirs cc’s… I believe that strictly having to pay with bank accounts, having a 90/10 split , and one weapon choice would help out!
 
Serious question, do we really know if the greenies are applying for tags just to not use them? Seems like we could find someone bragging about it in social media if they did.
I know for certain there are more greenies applying than you would imagine. The more California rejects we get here the more this will happen.
 
I agree with bugle. One weapon choice, cannot put rifle, muzzleloader than archery. That makes muzzle and archery easier to draw. I know a lot of people (mostly seen in the field) draw archery as a last choice, and do not think about the dedication it takes. Paying with bank accounts may deter a few, not sure how many. But, like I've stated in another thread, I believe a waiting period after drawing a quality/hd tag could help as well. In all my years of applying, sadly I have drawn ONE quality/hd tag. An archery deer hunt years ago. It's not that I don't apply for them, I just don't draw them. Then I go on social media and see the same person drawing it for the fifth straight year. And, they happen to have family in the department. It makes you wonder. That kind of stuff needs to be addresses as well. Landowner tags need to be changed as well.
 
California reject here commenting. :) .....

I like the idea of the every other year thing suggested by lik2hnt. I also like the idea of having to front the $$ in order to apply.

What if they changed it to that you had to show proof of vaccination? Or make it to where they only allow electric vehicles on NM public land?

I mentioned I am from Cali, right?
 
Well, I'll comment that way Bigfoot 1 will weigh in as well.

Choose weapon, yes.

Birth year, is a big No. You don't draw in your year, you have to sit out two years without even getting the chance to go. A waiting period should only be applied IF you draw that species for that species only.

Pay directly with a bank account can open a can of worms that Game and Fish wouldn't want to open...
 
Do you think that many people upfront the app. fees and carry that amount on their credit card? I don’t know, just asking.
I thought everyone did that. I’ve never heard of any NR I know not using a card. I’m not sending a check for 10k every year even if my wife would go for that! So, yes, I’d bet that would seriously cut down on NR apps if we had to send a check.
 
I'm honestly not worried about non residents, as it does not affect my chances of drawing. Roadrunner, I agree, the waiting period would be for the species, not all together. And, you could still draw standard hunts, just not quality hunts. I have a feeling applications will drop this year, as everyone is going back to work and not worried about having all that free time and free government money.
 
I thought everyone did that. I’ve never heard of any NR I know not using a card. I’m not sending a check for 10k every year even if my wife would go for that! So, yes, I’d bet that would seriously cut down on NR apps if we had to send a check.
I guess what I should have made clear in my thought was make a debit option, or an e check type payment. When I pay Pnm or nm gas I use the account number and routing number. Idk just a thought . If more people actually had to pay app fees from their own pocket it might weed out some.
Have a stipulation for NR to be able to continue with CC ? Idk it’s just a thought .
It’s never going to happen , people who couldn’t care less about our situation are the ones who make the calls.

Does anyone know how many apps there were last year?
 
I don't like the idea of one weapon at all. I like being able to put in with all different types of weapons. This year for elk I put in for muzzleloader first, rifle second and bow third. I take pride in being able to shoot them all well and being able to increase by odds by strategizing this way. I practice with whatever weapon I draw and enjoying the chance of drawing any of the three.
 
I don't like the idea of one weapon at all. I like being able to put in with all different types of weapons. This year for elk I put in for muzzleloader first, rifle second and bow third. I take pride in being able to shoot them all well and being able to increase by odds by strategizing this way. I practice with whatever weapon I draw and enjoying the chance of drawing any of the three.
Well you are one of the few. I see people every year buying a bow a couple weeks before the season, because they just put in in case they didn't draw rifle. I have always hunted either muzzleloader or archery. One rifle hunt my whole life. So I would want that change, how it used to be. Instead of seeing someone who has shot ten times with archery equipment taking 100 yard shots at animals.
 
I guess what I should have made clear in my thought was make a debit option, or an e check type payment. When I pay Pnm or nm gas I use the account number and routing number. Idk just a thought . If more people actually had to pay app fees from their own pocket it might weed out some.
Have a stipulation for NR to be able to continue with CC ? I know it’s just a
I don't like the idea of one weapon at all. I like being able to put in with all different types of weapons. This year for elk I put in for muzzleloader first, rifle second and bow third. I take pride in being able to shoot them all well and being able to increase by odds by strategizing this way. I practice with whatever weapon I draw and enjoying the chance of drawing any of the three.
I’m guilty for deer of choosing multiple weapons, but I’d definitely like to see it one weapon option.
 
Well you are one of the few. I see people every year buying a bow a couple weeks before the season, because they just put in in case they didn't draw rifle. I have always hunted either muzzleloader or archery. One rifle hunt my whole life. So I would want that change, how it used to be. Instead of seeing someone who has shot ten times with archery equipment taking 100 yard shots at animals.
I’m ? with you I believe that would drastically increase chances for archery and especially muzzy
 
I'm not a bowhunter but have thought about trying it. But I would never even put in for the draw until I was proficient with my bow, it's crazy to me that people would do that. I do currently do a lot of mix and match of Rifle and Muzzleloader in my choices, so I would kind of hate to loose that option. I'm not sure if you limit to 1 weapon or even 1 choice if your odds would really change much. I would think the really quality hunts might get easier to draw but then the easier to draw hunts now will get harder because people will pick those thinking they will at least get a tag.
 
I also think it should be the same way it used to be on how they did the draw. 1st choice pool, then second, then third for drawing. Not go by your application. I dont like the fact that people draw a hunt as their third choice, while someone puts it as their first and doesn't. Makes absolutely no sense to me.
 
I'm not a bowhunter but have thought about trying it. But I would never even put in for the draw until I was proficient with my bow, it's crazy to me that people would do that. I do currently do a lot of mix and match of Rifle and Muzzleloader in my choices, so I would kind of hate to loose that option. I'm not sure if you limit to 1 weapon or even 1 choice if your odds would really change much. I would think the really quality hunts might get easier to draw but then the easier to draw hunts now will get harder because people will pick those thinking they will at least get a tag.
I think archery and muzzleloader would get a lot easier to draw. The majority of people who put in for those hunts are second and third choices with mixed arms. And I agree, if you want to archery hunt, I am all for it. But, do not choose it just to have that option. Make sure you can handle it first.
 
I guess what I should have made clear in my thought was make a debit option, or an e check type payment. When I pay Pnm or nm gas I use the account number and routing number. Idk just a thought . If more people actually had to pay app fees from their own pocket it might weed out some.
Have a stipulation for NR to be able to continue with CC ? Idk it’s just a thought .
It’s never going to happen , people who couldn’t care less about our situation are the ones who make the calls.

Does anyone know how many apps there were last year?
282,052 apps in the 2021 big game draw.
 
I think archery and muzzleloader would get a lot easier to draw. The majority of people who put in for those hunts are second and third choices with mixed arms. And I agree, if you want to archery hunt, I am all for it. But, do not choose it just to have that option. Make sure you can handle it first.
?!
 
Just glad they didn't continue to go up at least.
Missed it by 7K and that's without big game ribs at vendors .Many people missed the deadline (as usual). Numbers will continue to climb , fiscally for funds its good , for the public land DIY hunter not so much . The days of confidently entering the draw are passing by , the idea of an electronic bingo hopper with that many apps and needing your app to be at the front of the line is a rough out look , but still a better option then our neighboring states draw system IMO. Every year many will be happy and many more will be upset, both sides valid in their emotion. Drawing a big game license I hope people will appreciate it more as it doesn't happen as often these days.
Cheers amigos ,time to find a spring turkey spot , this drought has really moved em and hurt the hatch so Im off to find some birds , wet a fly line and enjoy my family. Ill chat back with ya'll next month say 5 weeks ish...God Bless ...ya filthy animals
 
Missed it by 7K and that's without big game ribs at vendors .Many people missed the deadline (as usual). Numbers will continue to climb , fiscally for funds its good , for the public land DIY hunter not so much . The days of confidently entering the draw are passing by , the idea of an electronic bingo hopper with that many apps and needing your app to be at the front of the line is a rough out look , but still a better option then our neighboring states draw system IMO. Every year many will be happy and many more will be upset, both sides valid in their emotion. Drawing a big game license I hope people will appreciate it more as it doesn't happen as often these days.
Cheers amigos ,time to find a spring turkey spot , this drought has really moved em and hurt the hatch so Im off to find some birds , wet a fly line and enjoy my family. Ill chat back with ya'll next month say 5 weeks ish...God Bless ...ya filthy animals
Good luck and stay safe my friend
 
I like things just the way they are. We draw way more than we don’t. We’ve developed a system over the years that works for us. Good luck to all of you.
 
Last edited:
Applying other year doesn't do anything to your odds. You still have xx amount of people applying for x amount of tags. Increase your odds when you can apply but you can only apply half as much.

Maybe limit your hunt choices to 1 choice. This would give you better odds of drawing the tag you want. It would also keep rifle hunters from applying for an archery tag and vice versa.
You could also limit species you could apply for. Basically itd make everyone decide what they really want and they'd have a better chance at it.

Everyone applies for everything and everyone's odds are crap. Not much else you can do with lots of ppl and few tags.
 
Liked reading everyone’s thoughts and thanks for keeping it civil. Things are changing for everyone who hunts. And I hope I am wrong but our future is not looking great. Hope I am wrong.
Thanks
 
Point systems don't help your odds at either unless there's enough tags to clean out the upper point holders. Most places are well beyond this point.
Most ppl dont realize the states that square your points really don't help your odds. You just get swamped by the lower point holders. Say you have 101 applicants applying for 1 tag. 100 of them have 1pt and 1 has 10pts. The guy with 10pts has a 50% chance of drawing that tag. The next year he has 11 pts and the other 100 each have 2 pts. With 11pts you're now down to 23% chance.

Preference points are only cool for the people that get in on the ground level....like Wyoming.
 
Point systems don't help your odds at either unless there's enough tags to clean out the upper point holders. Most places are well beyond this point.
Most ppl dont realize the states that square your points really don't help your odds. You just get swamped by the lower point holders. Say you have 101 applicants applying for 1 tag. 100 of them have 1pt and 1 has 10pts. The guy with 10pts has a 50% chance of drawing that tag. The next year he has 11 pts and the other 100 each have 2 pts. With 11pts you're now down to 23% chance.

Preference points are only cool for the people that get in on the ground level....like Wyoming.
Yep not a fan! NM has the best draw system IMO. Just a couple things they can do to make it even better.
 
Bottom line is there are less hunting opportunities and more people hunting.
The narrative that less people hunt pushed by big tech/google/MSM a few years ago is a lie, just like everything else they pump out there.
They are trying to discourage people from hunting and put the belief out there among non hunters that hunting is on the way out.
Just the opposite as facts indicate.
Its not a bad thing, but, it does make it harder to find hunts.

Every state has its positives and negatives. Learn their systems and you will have tags. Piss and moan about it, and you wont.
 
I don't know about total numbers of hunters in the US decreasing or increasing but I do know that a LOT of midwestern guys that only whitetail hunted and such before are now headed west hunting. Especially with all the YouTube sensations and good economy. Lots of guys getting into hunting other states that never did before.
 
I'm not sure if you limit to 1 weapon or even 1 choice if your odds would really change much.

It would because an applicant's 3rd choice that's archery and the same hunt code as your 1st choice may get looked at before yours because they sit higher in the list after the shuffle. If they had to follow suit on weapon based on their 1st choice and it was an any legal weapon, they wouldn't even be a contender for your 1st choice that would've been their 3rd.

Applying other year doesn't do anything to your odds. You still have xx amount of people applying for x amount of tags. Increase your odds when you can apply but you can only apply half as much.

You're right, it doesn't because the same people are applying each year. It makes a difference if you have to sit out (waiting period) the next year because you drew. This allows the people who don't draw the opportunity to apply the following year. There will always be the same number of people sitting out each year instead of them thrown back into the mix every year, and one year it may be you.
 
I agree.....nm has one of the best draw systems.
Another thing with points is that people feel like they're missing out if they don't put in every year in a point system. Also ppl put everyone they know in so they can ride on their points after they draw...... points system = worse odds.
 
New Mexicans have pretty dang good odds of drawing an awesome elk tag.... like 50%! A wait period after drawing may be effective for residents. For non residents, I don't think itd make much difference. If there's 15 NR tags for a hunt and 500 applicants......them 15 sitting out doesn't change the odds much.
 
a
New Mexicans have pretty dang good odds of drawing an awesome elk tag.... like 50%! A wait period after drawing may be effective for residents. For non residents, I don't think itd make much difference. If there's 15 NR tags for a hunt and 500 applicants......them 15 sitting out doesn't change the odds much.
50% chance of drawing an awesome elk tag? And I am speaking for residents. I agree with Roadrunner on this. It should go back to first, second then third choice. I've said it before, and the way they do the draw, seems to me just an easier way to hide all their friends drawing every year. Don't get me wrong, I think we have a good system, just a couple tweaks to make it better. Everyone saying they draw good tags constantly must know something I don't. Because I can't even draw a unit 21 bow tag most years.
 
I'll use this one as an example... Unit 19 January archery hunt. Simply because it has only 10 tags. Look at the odds, 76 1st choice applicants, 69 second, and 39 third... Now, the ten who drew. 5 were first choice applicants. 4 were second and 1 was third. There is no way half of the hunters should be people who put it in as second or third choice. All of the tags should come out of the first choice applicants in my opinion.
 
Awesome is a relative term I guess. Awesome compared to any otc the hunt. Your 21 tag is about 50% odds and I'd call that an awesome tag.
Exactly which 21 tag is 50%? Because Im looking at the draw odds at the moment, and not one is ANYWHERE near 50% for unit 21 elk.
 
elk-2-281 archery 21a is 15% 1st archery. Wouldn't even be 50% for 1st choice applicants......
elk-2-282 archery 21a is 7 %
elk2-287 archery 21a is 20%
elk-2-288 archery 21b is 15%
elk2-2-289 archery 21b is 12%
and the rifle hunts are way worse. That is not a great elk unit, can be good in areas certain years, but overall not very good, especially 21b. Now, which one is anywhere near 50%?
 
That's going off toprut. Looking at the draw statistics from nmdfg won't give you true odds since some of the applicants will draw before getting to their later choices. Where did you get your odds from ?
 
Here's another one. This one really gets to me... 34 youth antlerless hunt. 120 tags, 114 first choice applicants. You know how many of those 114 drew the tag? 15!!!!!!!! The rest went to second and mostly third choice youth hunters. How is that fair? A lot of people put in for it to get their kids in the field, first choice, thinking they give themselves a better shot. When every single one of them should have drawn it, only 13% did. That is why it should change. Even if they don't change anything else, that needs to go back to the way it was before.
 
That's going off toprut. Looking at the draw statistics from nmdfg won't give you true odds since some of the applicants will draw before getting to their later choices. Where did you get your odds from ?
Directly off nmdgf. https://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/do...n-draw/2021-Big-Game-Drawing-Odds-Summary.pdf
I'd definitely trust their numbers more than toprut. That is the amount who put in. Even if you take the first choices only, it is nowhere near 50% on any of those hunts. So, toprut is obviously bloating it for some reason. And that would only be if they drew the way they used to. 1st-2nd- then 3rds.
 
Last edited:
So 203 total resident applicants for 43 tags. 68 are first choice the remaining 135 are 2nd or 3rd choice. Those 135 could draw another tag since it was their 2nd or 3rd choice. If all of them drew another tag first your odds would be approx 63%. That's unlikely so your odds are somewhere between 20% and 63%. I believe toprut simulates the draw lots of times to get averages and account for this. I believe you can read about it on their website. I think they're fairly close.

Sorry if this is getting off topic.
 
That's not the numbers. There were 138 resident first choice for that hunt. So, we can agree that they could not have drawn another tag before their first choice, correct? Even if we only take first choice applicants, 43 tags/ 138 applicants, 31 %. That is the ABSOLUTE best the draw odd could be. That is only including the first choice applicants. No one else, the more you add, the lower it goes. That is why I do not trust toprut or any of those. I had a hunt I put in for a few years ago that they claimed the next year was 100% draw rate. NMDGF showed 50%. I didn't draw it. So I spoke to the department and toprut. They both gave me the same answer. They are a "service" and use simulations and algorithms for their data. Probabilities do not need simulations and algorithms, they are from raw data when it is available. All of this information is public data, and can be found. I hope this shows my meaning and why I do not trust their odds. Who's numbers are you going to believe, the group that is audited and can be sued for false info or the service that can blame it on their algorithm?
So 203 total resident applicants for 43 tags. 68 are first choice the remaining 135 are 2nd or 3rd choice. Those 135 could draw another tag since it was their 2nd or 3rd choice. If all of them drew another tag first your odds would be approx 63%. That's unlikely so your odds are somewhere between 20% and 63%. I believe toprut simulates the draw lots of times to get averages and account for this. I believe you can read about it on their website. I think they're fairly close.

Sorry if this is getting off topic.
 
Last edited:
Here's another one. This one really gets to me... 34 youth antlerless hunt. 120 tags, 114 first choice applicants. You know how many of those 114 drew the tag? 15!!!!!!!! The rest went to second and mostly third choice youth hunters. How is that fair? A lot of people put in for it to get their kids in the field, first choice, thinking they give themselves a better shot. When every single one of them should have drawn it, only 13% did. That is why it should change. Even if they don't change anything else, that needs to go back to the way it was before.

It's fair because the 144 first choice applicants draw # was not lower than those who drew with 2nd/3rd choices. How the system works. NMs draw gets alot of things right imho, allowing more than just 1st choice to be looked at is one of them.
 
It's fair because the 144 first choice applicants draw # was not lower than those who drew with 2nd/3rd choices. How the system works. NMs draw gets alot of things right imho, allowing more than just 1st choice to be looked at is one of them.
New Mexico's draw gets a lot of things right, I'll agree there. But I will disagree that that is one. All species applications should not be pooled together either. Should be separated by species, then by choice. All it is is an easier process for them. They don't have to separate applications and choices by doing it this way.
 
It is absolutely impossible to predict an outcome in NM's draw process. As mossback50 states (and I summarize in my own words) the "odds" are just the face value from raw data of what the distribution of the tags are relative the number of tags given with how many people apply as 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice for that hunt code.

Application services are incorrect in their assumption if they run something like a Monte Carlo model and that it actually gives you an idea of draw odds.

First, a simulation like the Monte Carlo model is used to isolate and exclude anomalies in data. There are no anomalies. There are no random variables. The data published and used is clean and represents "dumb" numbers. Second, the successful outcome of an applicant's choices hinge solely on where their application falls in with all the other applications after the shuffle. There is absolutely no way to predict where that will be.

It doesn't matter if the model is ran 1,000 times or whatever limit they choose. The shuffle only happens once. Because of this, your application for a species competes with all the other applications for all other species in the pool.

To determine your "odds", you assume your application is within the top number of applications shuffled that reflect the hunt codes you apply for. Each choice on the application acts as its own application since all three choices are looked at before moving on. This means that all three choices of all applicants are in play for that one hunt code. Your actual "odds" of pulling the tag for a hunt code is a sum of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choices on applications, not just the total applications received.

You can further break it down by the distribution of who drew by the placement of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice. This distribution gives an indication of how quickly a hunt code "fills up" to guide you on what you should do for 2nd and 3rd choices. For those that have a lot of spare time on their hands, they can compile draw data themselves to identify trends with hunt codes.

Or, you can pay someone to compile it for you...
 
You slice a pie a hundred different ways but it doesn’t make more pie.

All these ideas of points systems, weighted entries, sitting out every other year won’t make a difference. There will still be way more people putting in than tags that are available. In my mind there is only 2 ways you can run a draw. Random draw or weighted entry. A first year applicant needs to have a chance of drawing, if not over time the sport will die off. Just because you put in for a tag for 10yrs and don’t draw doesn’t mean you are owed something, If you buy points for another states that state doesn’t owe you chit. All it is chance to get drawn, that’s it. Most of us will never draw a Bighorn sheep tag, that’s just life.
 
It is absolutely impossible to predict an outcome in NM's draw process. As mossback50 states (and I summarize in my own words) the "odds" are just the face value from raw data of what the distribution of the tags are relative the number of tags given with how many people apply as 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice for that hunt code.

Application services are incorrect in their assumption if they run something like a Monte Carlo model and that it actually gives you an idea of draw odds.

First, a simulation like the Monte Carlo model is used to isolate and exclude anomalies in data. There are no anomalies. There are no random variables. The data published and used is clean and represents "dumb" numbers. Second, the successful outcome of an applicant's choices hinge solely on where their application falls in with all the other applications after the shuffle. There is absolutely no way to predict where that will be.

It doesn't matter if the model is ran 1,000 times or whatever limit they choose. The shuffle only happens once. Because of this, your application for a species competes with all the other applications for all other species in the pool.

To determine your "odds", you assume your application is within the top number of applications shuffled that reflect the hunt codes you apply for. Each choice on the application acts as its own application since all three choices are looked at before moving on. This means that all three choices of all applicants are in play for that one hunt code. Your actual "odds" of pulling the tag for a hunt code is a sum of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choices on applications, not just the total applications received.

You can further break it down by the distribution of who drew by the placement of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice. This distribution gives an indication of how quickly a hunt code "fills up" to guide you on what you should do for 2nd and 3rd choices. For those that have a lot of spare time on their hands, they can compile draw data themselves to identify trends with hunt codes.

Or, you can pay someone to compile it for you...
Bingo, TopRuts odds are not even close to being realistic
 
You slice a pie a hundred different ways but it doesn’t make more pie.

All these ideas of points systems, weighted entries, sitting out every other year won’t make a difference. There will still be way more people putting in than tags that are available. In my mind there is only 2 ways you can run a draw. Random draw or weighted entry. A first year applicant needs to have a chance of drawing, if not over time the sport will die off. Just because you put in for a tag for 10yrs and don’t draw doesn’t mean you are owed something, If you buy points for another states that state doesn’t owe you chit. All it is chance to get drawn, that’s it. Most of us will never draw a Bighorn sheep tag, that’s just life.
Exactly!
 
You slice a pie a hundred different ways but it doesn’t make more pie.

All these ideas of points systems, weighted entries, sitting out every other year won’t make a difference. There will still be way more people putting in than tags that are available. In my mind there is only 2 ways you can run a draw. Random draw or weighted entry. A first year applicant needs to have a chance of drawing, if not over time the sport will die off. Just because you put in for a tag for 10yrs and don’t draw doesn’t mean you are owed something, If you buy points for another states that state doesn’t owe you chit. All it is chance to get drawn, that’s it. Most of us will never draw a Bighorn sheep tag, that’s just life.

But the more slices you make in the pie, the smaller and smaller piece you get.

And, just because you're getting on in years and may be crippled up or dead soon doesn't mean your owed anything either and a bighorn comparison is hardly a comparison at all.

Except I know three people close to home that have drawn RM Bighorn and two that have drawn Desert. Close enough that I have either worked with them or know them on a first name basis.

If waiting periods are irrelevant, then once in a lifetime should be as well...
 
I think waiting periods will make more people put their “cousin’s uncle” in for hunts, during their waiting periods.

A year waiting period in popular units would not increase draw odds much at all, but by requiring a waiting period you have a 100% chance of not drawing.
 
I think waiting periods will make more people put their “cousin’s uncle” in for hunts, during their waiting periods.

A year waiting period in popular units would not increase draw odds much at all, but by requiring a waiting period you have a 100% chance of not drawing.
You are correct again. We spilt our applications as it is, those who don’t draw purchase a bear or cougar tag and still get to hunt. We don’t have to harvest or even hunt for that matter, it’s all just about being there and enjoying the adventure. I could get 10 guys overnight to apply if I just invited them hunting. The draw is a good thing for us, it’s not going anywhere anytime soon.
 
New Mexico's draw gets a lot of things right, I'll agree there. But I will disagree that that is one. All species applications should not be pooled together either. Should be separated by species, then by choice. All it is is an easier process for them. They don't have to separate applications and choices by doing it this way.

Breaking things up would be nice and allow better predictions but overall seems lazy to throw everything into the pot.
 
people put their “cousin’s uncle” in for hunts

They already do...

A year waiting period in popular units would not increase draw odds much at all, but by requiring a waiting period you have a 100% chance of not drawing.

If the draw were done by unit, I'd agree. With how NM does it, you reduce the application count by how many drew the year before. If there were 230,000 applications in year 1, and 60,000 people drew, in year 2 there would be 170,000 applicants. I doubt there would be a surge in applications to replace the total on a wait list unless some talking head or application services announced it like a rooster crowing on top of a dung pile...
 
Breaking things up would be nice and allow better predictions but overall seems lazy to throw everything into the pot.
Except what we are talking about is draw odds. Not a companies "prediction" of what the draw odds are. The numbers are raw data. You cannot change the input. It is there. Show me one time there prediction has been correct. They say 50% for some hunts that truly will not reach 25%. We can tell the highest draw odds simply by looking at the first choice applicants. I'll break it down. If there are 25 tags. 100 first choice applicants. The best draw odds you can have are 25%. I don't care how toprut or any of those say 50%, it is simply not true. There is no way possible to get to 50% when you have four times the amount of first choice applicants as tags.

Lets say that same hunt. 25 tags. 100 first choice applicants. 100 second, 100 third. Out of the 25 tags, 12 went to first choice, 8 to second and 5 to third. So, even just adding those 12 seconds who drew and 8 thirds, if all others in those pools drew other tags, so second and third choice is 100% drawn, that means 120 people were in the drawing pool. The number of tags did not increase, so instead of 25%, we are at 20%. That's if everyone else in second and third choice aside from successful draw drew another tag FIRST. If not, successful draw rate goes down, which it does. So, therefore, there is no possible way that hunt could be 50%, which is what toprut "said". Their numbers just do not logically compute to the raw data we have. Math is numbers, and when you have the real numbers, you can't argue it no matter how much the Obama administration wanted us to.

Why even have choices if it is all put in together. Why should someone draw a hunt that they really don't want, when many more have it as their first choice go to hunt? Overall, I like NM's draw process, I just think it needs those minor tweaks. If it had that, in my opinion, it would be dam near perfect.
 
Lots of good points here! The fact that nm is completely and also goes across the board with choices when apps are pulled , there’s no way we can do the exact math. You gotta good handle on it for sure , but this

“If there are 25 tags. 100 first choice applicants. The best draw odds you can have are 25%.”

Is not correct … if all of those 100 first choice applicants are all drawn at the bottoms of the stack and not one draws it as a 1st choice (theoretically)that makes that theory not valid and that’s exactly why we can’t compute our odds to 100% accuracy.
 
If y’all get the NM draw and hunting all messed up please protest the odds at The Inn Of the Mountain Gods. I am so sick of going there and seeing people win a couple grand in a night and I blow $500 playing in the same dang Casino and walk away with nothing. Something needs to be done so me and my friends stop losing and start winning. Not fair. Thanks
 
If y’all get the NM draw and hunting all messed up please protest the odds at The Inn Of the Mountain Gods. I am so sick of going there and seeing people win a couple grand in a night and I blow $500 playing in the same dang Casino and walk away with nothing. Something needs to be done so me and my friends stop losing and start winning. Not fair. Thanks
Ha ha that's why I don't go to casinos anymore.
 
Lots of good points here! The fact that nm is completely and also goes across the board with choices when apps are pulled , there’s no way we can do the exact math. You gotta good handle on it for sure , but this

“If there are 25 tags. 100 first choice applicants. The best draw odds you can have are 25%.”

Is not correct … if all of those 100 first choice applicants are all drawn at the bottoms of the stack and not one draws it as a 1st choice (theoretically)that makes that theory not valid and that’s exactly why we can’t compute our odds to 100% accuracy.
But it is correct. That means there are at least that many in the drawing pool for it as their first choice. Numbers are numbers big dog. You cannot change the numbers. Math is not science where you have theories (except higher up). There is a number of people who put in (the denominator) and a number who draw (the numerator). Divide the numerator by the denominator and that gives you your odds. It's plain math. Doesn't matter how they do the draw. The more people in the drawing pool, the lower the odds of drawing are. This, oh there's 400 total apps, and fifty tags, your drawing odds are 50%, doesn't add up. Numbers are numbers. But, let's get back to the original question. Again, I like New Mexico's draw. It is better than anywhere. Basically a one month turn around. Can't beat that. Can April 23rd hurry up and get here?
 
But it is correct. That means there are at least that many in the drawing pool for it as their first choice. Numbers are numbers big dog. You cannot change the numbers. Math is not science where you have theories (except higher up). There is a number of people who put in (the denominator) and a number who draw (the numerator). Divide the numerator by the denominator and that gives you your odds. It's plain math. Doesn't matter how they do the draw. The more people in the drawing pool, the lower the odds of drawing are. This, oh there's 400 total apps, and fifty tags, your drawing odds are 50%, doesn't add up. Numbers are numbers. But, let's get back to the original question. Again, I like New Mexico's draw. It is better than anywhere. Basically a one month turn around. Can't beat that. Can April 23rd hurry up and get here?
I agree math is the language that don’t lie! You add in a lottery system and it’s a whole different deal! Good luck??
 
Except what we are talking about is draw odds. Not a companies "prediction" of what the draw odds are. The numbers are raw data. You cannot change the input. It is there. Show me one time there prediction has been correct. They say 50% for some hunts that truly will not reach 25%. We can tell the highest draw odds simply by looking at the first choice applicants. I'll break it down. If there are 25 tags. 100 first choice applicants. The best draw odds you can have are 25%. I don't care how toprut or any of those say 50%, it is simply not true. There is no way possible to get to 50% when you have four times the amount of first choice applicants as tags.

Lets say that same hunt. 25 tags. 100 first choice applicants. 100 second, 100 third. Out of the 25 tags, 12 went to first choice, 8 to second and 5 to third. So, even just adding those 12 seconds who drew and 8 thirds, if all others in those pools drew other tags, so second and third choice is 100% drawn, that means 120 people were in the drawing pool. The number of tags did not increase, so instead of 25%, we are at 20%. That's if everyone else in second and third choice aside from successful draw drew another tag FIRST. If not, successful draw rate goes down, which it does. So, therefore, there is no possible way that hunt could be 50%, which is what toprut "said". Their numbers just do not logically compute to the raw data we have. Math is numbers, and when you have the real numbers, you can't argue it no matter how much the Obama administration wanted us to.

Why even have choices if it is all put in together. Why should someone draw a hunt that they really don't want, when many more have it as their first choice go to hunt? Overall, I like NM's draw process, I just think it needs those minor tweaks. If it had that, in my opinion, it would be dam near perfect.

What I was speaking too was if NM would break up how they conduct the draw and go down to each species in a specific order. That would however allow for easier draw calculations.
 
No need to break up the draw by species. That is done by default. Only ibex apps have any effect on your ibex app, period. No amount of elk, deer, bighorn (etc) apps have any influence on you drawing your ibex tag regardless of where they (or you) fall in the draw sequence. Although all apps are assigned numbers in the original shuffle, no species has any bearing on other species.

Historical draw odds are very easy to figure out. This can give you an idea of what may happen this year, but not a 100% prediction. Total resident applicants (1st, 2nd & 3rd choice) vs total resident tags. If a hunt has 50 resident tags and 100 resident applicants, the draw odds were 50%. It doesn’t matter who drew it as which choice. 50% of hunters drew, 50% didn’t. It’s very simple math and where those 100 apps landed in the shuffle is irrelevant. They could have been the first 100 after the shuffle or the last 100 (or anywhere in between!) without any change to the odds. 50%….

I like three choices and the ability to put in for multiple weapons. I have never not wanted my 3rd choice!!! I want my 1st more, but like the idea of having better odds by having three choices. If choices were drawn separately there would be no need for anything but first choice as we have far more demand than supply.

90/10 would be the only change I would make to the draw.

Lastly, blaming the third choice option for people being unprepared to bow hunt is ridiculous. Some people are lazy, and will be regardless of their weapon choice. I bet most rifle hunters shoot only 1-5 boxes of ammo in the year before a hunt. Rifle or bow, many hunters are sloppy, unprepared, and unrealistic when it comes to knowing (and staying within) their effective range. Skilled rifle shooting may be easier than bow shooting but BOTH require practice and discipline to get right. (I like to do both and love being able to apply for both)
 
No need to break up the draw by species. That is done by default. Only ibex apps have any effect on your ibex app, period. No amount of elk, deer, bighorn (etc) apps have any influence on you drawing your ibex tag regardless of where they (or you) fall in the draw sequence. Although all apps are assigned numbers in the original shuffle, no species has any bearing on other species.

Historical draw odds are very easy to figure out. This can give you an idea of what may happen this year, but not a 100% prediction. Total resident applicants (1st, 2nd & 3rd choice) vs total resident tags. If a hunt has 50 resident tags and 100 resident applicants, the draw odds were 50%. It doesn’t matter who drew it as which choice. 50% of hunters drew, 50% didn’t. It’s very simple math and where those 100 apps landed in the shuffle is irrelevant. They could have been the first 100 after the shuffle or the last 100 (or anywhere in between!) without any change to the odds. 50%….

I like three choices and the ability to put in for multiple weapons. I have never not wanted my 3rd choice!!! I want my 1st more, but like the idea of having better odds by having three choices. If choices were drawn separately there would be no need for anything but first choice as we have far more demand than supply.

90/10 would be the only change I would make to the draw.

Lastly, blaming the third choice option for people being unprepared to bow hunt is ridiculous. Some people are lazy, and will be regardless of their weapon choice. I bet most rifle hunters shoot only 1-5 boxes of ammo in the year before a hunt. Rifle or bow, many hunters are sloppy, unprepared, and unrealistic when it comes to knowing (and staying within) their effective range. Skilled rifle shooting may be easier than bow shooting but BOTH require practice and discipline to get right. (I like to do both and love being able to apply for both)
The reason I blame the third choice is simple. They would never attempt to archery hunt any other way. And shooting a rifle is a lot less technical than a bow. Archery requires countless hours of practice to become efficient as you know. Not all hunters are like that, but that is the majority of them. I have never met someone who puts in all archery and goes and buys the bow a week or two before the hunt. That's always the third choicer who never would of even thought about archery hunting otherwise. I'm just speaking from my experience in the field.

You are correct though, many hunters are just as lazy with rifles. Shoot five times to sight in and that is their entire practice. There is less margin for error with a rifle though.
 
No need to break up the draw by species. That is done by default. Only ibex apps have any effect on your ibex app, period. No amount of elk, deer, bighorn (etc) apps have any influence on you drawing your ibex tag regardless of where they (or you) fall in the draw sequence. Although all apps are assigned numbers in the original shuffle, no species has any bearing on other species.

Not true. Those ibex and oryx applications can cause you to be further down the list relative to your elk application. If 30,000 elk licenses are given out, your application needs to be in the top 30,000 of those elk applications after the shuffle to even have yours looked at.

If you were to assume one tag was assigned for each species for each set of applications (8 species total in the 1st block, the same for the 2nd block, etc.) after the shuffle - certainly not likely - you would of course find the species with the fewest tags "running out" first. Then the next species with the next fewest tags and so on. The last remaining species are Elk and Deer. This is the best case scenario which, as I stated earlier, is certainly not likely to happen.

Your application standing against all the other applications certainly matters.

I like three choices and the ability to put in for multiple weapons. I have never not wanted my 3rd choice!!! I want my 1st more, but like the idea of having better odds by having three choices. If choices were drawn separately there would be no need for anything but first choice as we have far more demand than supply.

Lastly, blaming the third choice option for people being unprepared to bow hunt is ridiculous. Some people are lazy, and will be regardless of their weapon choice. I bet most rifle hunters shoot only 1-5 boxes of ammo in the year before a hunt. Rifle or bow, many hunters are sloppy, unprepared, and unrealistic when it comes to knowing (and staying within) their effective range. Skilled rifle shooting may be easier than bow shooting but BOTH require practice and discipline to get right. (I like to do both and love being able to apply for both)

Except your 3rd choice you don't want is someone else's 1st choice they do want and your 1st choice you do want is their 3rd choice. That's what mossback50 is saying. I know two guys on a group application that pulled their 3rd choice which was the 2nd archery in Valle Vidal. They did that because they wanted their first two choices more as the VV is once in a lifetime. Completely debunks Toprut's conclusions in the article link posted above.

If someone's 3rd choice is archery and they are a firearms hunter (rifle and muzzy both) and then draw that 3rd choice and have never shot a bow and then go buy one to practice and get proficient enough with it is where the mixed weapon type is taking the opportunity away from the archery only guy. I know many disagree with this viewpoint but that's what is really happening.

If a rifle hunter has to shoot 20 to 120 rounds a year to stay in good practice, maybe they shouldn't be hunting at all as their is very little muscle memory compared to archery...
 
Maybe everybody should be limited to one choice for each species with one weapon type. That would solve all the dilemma some to be dealing with in the application process.
 
Basic math says half this year and half next year doesn’t increase your odds. A 10% chance this year and the next and the next gives you a….. 10% chance to draw and hopefully in 10 years you will pull a tag…. You cut applicants in half….. you have a 20% one year and 0% the next which in turn over a 10 year period equals….. you got it 10% and hopefully in 10 years you will pull 1 tag.

My personal thoughts keep the process the same BUT!!!! If you draw a Q/HD hunt you cannot draw a quality HD hunt for the next 2 years of that species. My wife has been one of the lucky ones where we had a Gila tag 3 out of 5 years…. And the 2 years she didn’t I drew a Gila tag. All first archery hunt minus one second season for my wife but was I pumped???? HELL YEAH!!!!! But I see where there some people that might never get that prime time tag based strictly off luck. It wouldn’t impact the draw odds drastically either but would help a little bit. Only down fall is it would make draw odds in lower quality units harder. After it’s in place because it’s force people to apply there on their 2 year break. I want to avoid points systems but I think this could be a ok solution
 
Not true. Those ibex and oryx applications can cause you to be further down the list relative to your elk application. If 30,000 elk licenses are given out, your application needs to be in the top 30,000 of those elk applications after the shuffle to even have yours looked at.


If someone's 3rd choice is archery and they are a firearms hunter (rifle and muzzy both) and then draw that 3rd choice and have never shot a bow and then go buy one to practice and get proficient enough with it is where the mixed weapon type is taking the opportunity away from the archery only guy. I know many disagree with this viewpoint but that's what is really happening.
Cory is correct if you apple for elk you are only completing against other elk apps . It doesn’t matter if 20,000 or 30000 deer apps get draw in front of you. It only matters how many elk apps are drawn in front of you. Breaking the draw up by species or hunt code won’t change your odds at all, it will only make it easy to understand.

Once again no one is owed anything. Just because you choose to be a bow hunter doesn’t mean you should have preference over someone who doesn’t prefer to hunt with a bow but will to increase odds of drawing a tag.
 
Cory is correct if you apple for elk you are only completing against other elk apps . It doesn’t matter if 20,000 or 30000 deer apps get draw in front of you. It only matters how many elk apps are drawn in front of you. Breaking the draw up by species or hunt code won’t change your odds at all, it will only make it easy to understand.

Once again no one is owed anything. Just because you choose to be a bow hunter doesn’t mean you should have preference over someone who doesn’t prefer to hunt with a bow but will to increase odds of drawing a tag.
You are correct. Life’s not fair but life sure is good!
 
Cory is correct if you apple for elk you are only completing against other elk apps . It doesn’t matter if 20,000 or 30000 deer apps get draw in front of you. It only matters how many elk apps are drawn in front of you. Breaking the draw up by species or hunt code won’t change your odds at all, it will only make it easy to understand.

Once again no one is owed anything. Just because you choose to be a bow hunter doesn’t mean you should have preference over someone who doesn’t prefer to hunt with a bow but will to increase odds of drawing a tag.

No, he's only partially correct. Those deer applications can put you toward the bottom of the list because your place holder is determined by those applications. If all the applications put your elk application as the last number of 230,000 out of 230,000, then guess what, all of the elk applications were looked at before yours. I can't understand that for you.

There are a few hurdles to overcome. 1st your application has to be seen early enough for it to even matter. 2nd, it has to be within the the total applicants that applied for a given hunt code based on their choice ranking. 1st choice for that hunt code doesn't necessarily mean you'll get it because if there are 200 tags available and total of 1,000 "applicants" based on the sum of all the choices for that hunt code and your application is once again the very last one in the stack because of an initial draw order, you lose. If this is repeated for the other two choices, well, I can't understand that one for you either.

The smaller the sample size, the higher your chance is that your application will get looked at on a regular basis. The higher the sample size, the greater your chance is of not having your application looked at on a regular basis. Kind of a "law of averages" thing. For the third time, I can't understand that for you either.

Get off the owing rant. Nobody anywhere said anything about being owed anything except the guy that 'Liked' your post.
 
Last edited:
Basic math says half this year and half next year doesn’t increase your odds. A 10% chance this year and the next and the next gives you a….. 10% chance to draw and hopefully in 10 years you will pull a tag…. You cut applicants in half….. you have a 20% one year and 0% the next which in turn over a 10 year period equals….. you got it 10% and hopefully in 10 years you will pull 1 tag.

My personal thoughts keep the process the same BUT!!!! If you draw a Q/HD hunt you cannot draw a quality HD hunt for the next 2 years of that species. My wife has been one of the lucky ones where we had a Gila tag 3 out of 5 years…. And the 2 years she didn’t I drew a Gila tag. All first archery hunt minus one second season for my wife but was I pumped???? HELL YEAH!!!!! But I see where there some people that might never get that prime time tag based strictly off luck. It wouldn’t impact the draw odds drastically either but would help a little bit. Only down fall is it would make draw odds in lower quality units harder. After it’s in place because it’s force people to apply there on their 2 year break. I want to avoid points systems but I think this could be a ok solution

No, if you draw in year 1, your odds were 100%. The next year it will be 0% for that one species. When you don't draw, you keep applying until you do. Those who sit out can't even apply for a Standard rated hunt for that species the year after they draw.

But you said it correct. It will not improve your odds drastically, it will help a little bit. Someone who hasn't pulled a tag in 10 years of applying for Standard hunts for all three choices, obeying the "rules of the road" so to speak, will gladly take even a percent or two on increasing their odds.
 
No, he's only partially correct. Those deer applications can put you toward the bottom of the list because your place holder is determined by those applications. If all the applications put your elk application as the last number of 230,000 out of 230,000, then guess what, all of the elk applications were looked at before yours. I can't understand that for you.
A deer ap ahead of you has no impact on your elk ap. If there are 10 tags for your hunt choice, and you are number 11 overall, but 3 were deer aps, you draw.
 
No, he's only partially correct. Those deer applications can put you toward the bottom of the list because your place holder is determined by those applications. If all the applications put your elk application as the last number of 230,000 out of 230,000, then guess what, all of the elk applications were looked at before yours. I can't understand that for you.

There are a few hurdles to overcome. 1st your application has to be seen early enough for it to even matter. 2nd, it has to be within the the total applicants that applied for a given hunt code based on their choice ranking. 1st choice for that hunt code doesn't necessarily mean you'll get it because if there are 200 tags available and total of 1,000 "applicants" based on the sum of all the choices for that hunt code and your application is once again the very last one in the stack because of an initial draw order, you lose. If this is repeated for the other two choices, well, I can't understand that one for you either.

The smaller the sample size, the higher your chance is that your application will get looked at on a regular basis. The higher the sample size, the greater your chance is of not having your application looked at on a regular basis. Kind of a "law of averages" thing. For the third time, I can't understand that for you either.

Get off the owing rant. Nobody anywhere said anything about being owed anything except the guy that 'Liked' your post.
Are you trying to tell me it is more difficult to draw an elk tag in NM because there are too many deer applicants???? If that is what you are saying, then you are wrong.
In the last 8 years I've only drawn one elk tag and a deer tag 7 out of 8 years. I don't draw elk as often because the elk tags I try to draw have many more elk applicants than tags. It has nothing to do with deer applicants.
 
If there is 40,000 elk tags available and 230,000 total applications. Your odds of drawing an elk tag is 1 in 40,000. Those odds don’t change wether your app is drawn at 40,000 or 100,000.
If there are 40,000 elk tags and 230,000 applicants, then the odds are 1 in 5.75 of each applicant drawing a tag. The truth is many of the elk tags in NM have less than 1 in 100 odds. Many hunters apply all three choices for hunts that have less than 5% odds and wonder why they haven't drawn a tag after applying for 10 years. In NM it is difficult to determine exactly what your odds of drawing a particular tag but you can make a very close estimate.
 
A deer ap ahead of you has no impact on your elk ap. If there are 10 tags for your hunt choice, and you are number 11 overall, but 3 were deer aps, you draw.

Talking solely on how you get your random number assigned relative to all the applications for the species you applied for.

It's amazing how many guys apply with no understanding of how the draw works and your "real" odds of drawing

How the Draw Works

Pay particular attention to the last paragraph...

Are you trying to tell me it is more difficult to draw an elk tag in NM because there are too many deer applicants???? If that is what you are saying, then you are wrong.
In the last 8 years I've only drawn one elk tag and a deer tag 7 out of 8 years. I don't draw elk as often because the elk tags I try to draw have many more elk applicants than tags. It has nothing to do with deer applicants.

Yes, those "deer applications" will have an affect in what random number you are assigned. The more random numbers that are assigned, the further your chances could be away from being one of those included in the number of applicants that match the total elk licenses that are available across the board. If you are a lucky person year after year, it's because your random number is always good enough to have your application looked at "first".

If you are only competing with elk applicants and your random number were generated from that and there are 30,000 tags available for 60,000 total applications, you have a 1:2 chance your application will be in that upper tier. If there are 230,000 total applications across the board for all species, and your random number is a function of those 230,000, then you have a 1:7.6 chance your application will be in that upper tier.

If you are anywhere in those lower tiers, then better luck next time...
 
Talking solely on how you get your random number assigned relative to all the applications for the species you applied for.



How the Draw Works

Pay particular attention to the last paragraph...



Yes, those "deer applications" will have an affect in what random number you are assigned. The more random numbers that are assigned, the further your chances could be away from being one of those included in the number of applicants that match the total elk licenses that are available across the board. If you are a lucky person year after year, it's because your random number is always good enough to have your application looked at "first".

If you are only competing with elk applicants and your random number were generated from that and there are 30,000 tags available for 60,000 total applications, you have a 1:2 chance your application will be in that upper tier. If there are 230,000 total applications across the board for all species, and your random number is a function of those 230,000, then you have a 1:7.6 chance your application will be in that upper tier.

If you are anywhere in those lower tiers, then better luck next time...
I know I was agreeing with you on my earlier post. I was referring to these other guys who keep arguing with you. And also to that fella that thinks there are elk units with a 50% chance of drawing because TopRut says so
 
I know I was agreeing with you on my earlier post. I was referring to these other guys who keep arguing with you. And also to that fella that thinks there are elk units with a 50% chance of drawing because TopRut says so
Ya toprut is so far off on a lot of their odds. It amazes me how they can stay saying they are a legit business. 21b may have a hunt that's close to 50%, but that is FAR from a great elk hunt as the poster stated.
 
I am confused.... i apply for multiple species. In the drawing NMDGF draws for each species independently from other species correct? So they do a random shuffle for all ELK applications, then another for all deer applications, and so on. Is this correct?
 

New Mexico Guides & Outfitters

H & A Outfitters

Private and public land hunts since 1992 for elk, mule deer, sheep, pronghorn, black Bear & lion hunts.

505 Outfitters

Public and private land big game hunts. Rifle, muzzleloader and archery hunts available. Free Draw Application Service!

Sierra Blanca Outfitters

Offering a wide array of hunt opportunities and putting clients in prime position to bag a trophy.

Urge 2 Hunt

Hunts in New Mexico on private ranches and remote public land in the top units. Elk vouchers available.

Mangas Outfitters

Landowner tags available! Hunt big bulls and bucks. Any season and multiple hunt units to choose from.

Back
Top Bottom